I have never quite understood if playing lower down the order is supposed to help your average or reduce it? I mean here you are implying that 36 at that position is worth more while for someone like Dhoni, 50+ average is explained away as a result of not outs he gets while batting down the order.

I think it depends on what sort of lower middle order player you are, tbf. The likes of Bevan and Dhoni are genuine finishers, and they looked to shepherd the innings to completion; that leads to a lot of not outs and can result in an average a little higher than one's actual value in those innings. Lower middle order players like Raina and Cairns have different roles, to really accelerate around the genuine finishers and look for boundaries. The averages of those players are probably a little lower than their actual value because they throw their wickets away at times.

Recognition of Property Rights in material objects is the recognition of a manís right to exist; his right to pursue his own goals in his own manner at his own discretion with what is rightfully his to command. Just as the Right to Life is the right to the property of oneís own person, so the right to own material products is the right to sustain oneís life and to keep the results of oneís own efforts.

Despite being dead against Rohit's inclusion at the start of the match, have to say that the selectors were right in sticking with him. Not because he scored runs, anybody can do that given enough chances, but the way he made them. It is a big gamble to give him yet more chances, but one that has to be taken because the possible payoff is huge.

Far from convinced reg him as a opener. He has made these runs before and then followed it up with a whole year of failures.

He has all the talent, but ODI is probably not his game right now tbh and he isn't a opener.

Sky guys pointing out something we all know, that Finn hitting the stumps with his knee isn't a distraction.

As I said back in the SA series, I'd be letting it go the first and maybe second time he does it, but when it was happening as regularly as it was back then, it is a distraction in itself, because once it has happened a few times, you know what is going on and it attracts your attention even further.

I think it depends on what sort of lower middle order player you are, tbf. The likes of Bevan and Dhoni are genuine finishers, and they looked to shepherd the innings to completion; that leads to a lot of not outs and can result in an average a little higher than one's actual value in those innings. Lower middle order players like Raina and Cairns have different roles, to really accelerate around the genuine finishers and look for boundaries. The averages of those players are probably a little lower than their actual value because they throw their wickets away at times.

I think a batsman gets an average he deserves, where he bats and what role he performs doesn't matter. Only thing with which batting average can have trade offs is Strike Rate. In the scenario that you mention, if the two batsmen are equally valuable, one will have better average, other will have better SR. If despite seemingly playing those two different roles, one batsman has better average as well as SR, he is most likely the superior batsman.

I imagine that not that many here from the UK are going to be up at 3 a.m. on Sunday to watch a dead game. I might catch the end of the first innings.

Not surprised to see most here putting the boot into Dernbach (he was better in his last spell, but the match had gone by then) although Bresnan and Patel were just as expensive yesterday and neither should think themselves guaranteed a place. We don't have an Ealham-type player anymore do we, a steady medium-pacer who can bowl 10 overs for under 40 while contributing at 7 or 8. Bresnan I suppose comes nearest; Woakes doesn't really fit the bill, neither does Wright. Buttler as keeper isn't ideal either - he's only Somerset's reserve one-day keeper - though they may as well stick with it for the last game.

Difference is that Bresnan was tight early up (at a time when Dernbach had previously bowled expensive ****e) and then Dernbach came on when the fielding restrictions were at their best for bowlers and conceded a shed-load. That he bowled a couple of cheap overs at the end after the match was over shouldn't cloud the fact that he was tripe when it mattered.

Patel is also in the team for more than just his bowling.

marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

I imagine that not that many here from the UK are going to be up at 3 a.m. on Sunday to watch a dead game. I might catch the end of the first innings.

Not surprised to see most here putting the boot into Dernbach (he was better in his last spell, but the match had gone by then) although Bresnan and Patel were just as expensive yesterday and neither should think themselves guaranteed a place. We don't have an Ealham-type player anymore do we, a steady medium-pacer who can bowl 10 overs for under 40 while contributing at 7 or 8. Bresnan I suppose comes nearest; Woakes doesn't really fit the bill, neither does Wright. Buttler as keeper isn't ideal either - he's only Somerset's reserve one-day keeper - though they may as well stick with it for the last game.

We have plenty of Ealham types, but they'd just be slaughtered in modern cricket. Ealham was hopeless away as it was.

Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.Walt Whitman

"The PFA does not represent players when they have broken the law and been convicted on non-football matters."- Gordon Taylor in 2009 following Marlon King's release after a prison sentence for sexual assault & ABH